农业环境契约的制度设计——利益相关者的态度如何为政策制定提供信息

Q open Pub Date : 2023-02-07 DOI:10.1093/qopen/qoad001
C. Schulze, B. Matzdorf
{"title":"农业环境契约的制度设计——利益相关者的态度如何为政策制定提供信息","authors":"C. Schulze, B. Matzdorf","doi":"10.1093/qopen/qoad001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Agri-environmental climate measures (AECM) are considered a promising tool to achieve environmental policy goals. Not only farmers but also policy administrators and intermediaries are important actors whose attitudes and actions drive the success of these measures. To follow the idea of better stakeholder participation in the design of policy instruments, we analyse stakeholder viewpoints on the contract design of AECM. We apply Q methodology with 25 individuals from Brandenburg, Germany, who are from the farmer, policy administrator and intermediary domains. We identify three distinct attitudinal profiles, the “planners”, the “cooperators” and the “individualists”, which do not correspond to the three individual stakeholder groups. The results provide evidence that general differences in the viewpoints of policy designers and implementers on the one hand and farmers on the other hand are not a source of potential institutional mismatch. We further use the attitudinal profiles to develop three types of policy programmes with slightly different underlying rationalities. Policymakers could use such an approach to better develop target group-specific (sub)programmes in parallel. Our research strengthens the argument that multiple stakeholders should be involved in co-designing conservation measures. Moreover, behavioural factors should be considered in policy making processes.","PeriodicalId":87350,"journal":{"name":"Q open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The institutional design of agri-environmental contracts - How stakeholder attitudes can inform policy making\",\"authors\":\"C. Schulze, B. Matzdorf\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/qopen/qoad001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Agri-environmental climate measures (AECM) are considered a promising tool to achieve environmental policy goals. Not only farmers but also policy administrators and intermediaries are important actors whose attitudes and actions drive the success of these measures. To follow the idea of better stakeholder participation in the design of policy instruments, we analyse stakeholder viewpoints on the contract design of AECM. We apply Q methodology with 25 individuals from Brandenburg, Germany, who are from the farmer, policy administrator and intermediary domains. We identify three distinct attitudinal profiles, the “planners”, the “cooperators” and the “individualists”, which do not correspond to the three individual stakeholder groups. The results provide evidence that general differences in the viewpoints of policy designers and implementers on the one hand and farmers on the other hand are not a source of potential institutional mismatch. We further use the attitudinal profiles to develop three types of policy programmes with slightly different underlying rationalities. Policymakers could use such an approach to better develop target group-specific (sub)programmes in parallel. Our research strengthens the argument that multiple stakeholders should be involved in co-designing conservation measures. Moreover, behavioural factors should be considered in policy making processes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":87350,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Q open\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Q open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/qopen/qoad001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Q open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/qopen/qoad001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

农业环境气候措施(AECM)被认为是实现环境政策目标的有前途的工具。不仅是农民,政策管理者和中介机构也是重要的行为者,他们的态度和行动推动了这些措施的成功。为了遵循利益相关者更好地参与政策工具设计的思想,我们分析了AECM合同设计中的利益相关者观点。我们对来自德国勃兰登堡的25名个体采用Q方法,他们分别来自农民、政策管理者和中介领域。我们确定了三种不同的态度概况,即“规划者”、“合作者”和“个人主义者”,它们不对应于三个单独的利益相关者群体。研究结果表明,政策制定者和实施者与农民之间观点的普遍差异并不是潜在制度错配的根源。我们进一步利用态度概况来制定三种基本理性略有不同的政策方案。决策者可以利用这种方法更好地同时制定针对特定目标群体的(次级)方案。我们的研究加强了多方利益相关者应该参与共同设计保护措施的论点。此外,在决策过程中应考虑行为因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The institutional design of agri-environmental contracts - How stakeholder attitudes can inform policy making
Agri-environmental climate measures (AECM) are considered a promising tool to achieve environmental policy goals. Not only farmers but also policy administrators and intermediaries are important actors whose attitudes and actions drive the success of these measures. To follow the idea of better stakeholder participation in the design of policy instruments, we analyse stakeholder viewpoints on the contract design of AECM. We apply Q methodology with 25 individuals from Brandenburg, Germany, who are from the farmer, policy administrator and intermediary domains. We identify three distinct attitudinal profiles, the “planners”, the “cooperators” and the “individualists”, which do not correspond to the three individual stakeholder groups. The results provide evidence that general differences in the viewpoints of policy designers and implementers on the one hand and farmers on the other hand are not a source of potential institutional mismatch. We further use the attitudinal profiles to develop three types of policy programmes with slightly different underlying rationalities. Policymakers could use such an approach to better develop target group-specific (sub)programmes in parallel. Our research strengthens the argument that multiple stakeholders should be involved in co-designing conservation measures. Moreover, behavioural factors should be considered in policy making processes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Who Can Predict Farmers’ Choices in Risky Gambles? Socioeconomic impacts of land restoration in agriculture: a systematic review Unpacking Stakeholder Perceptions on Challenges for Increasing Adoption of Solar- Powered Irrigation Systems in India: A Q Methodology Study Are lessons being learnt from the replication crisis or will the revolution devour its children? Open Q science from the editor's perspective Effects of institutional distrust on value estimates of stated preference surveys in developing countries: a choice experiment on conserving biodiversity within agricultural landscapes in a biodiversity hotspot
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1